Take a tour
invite your friends
- Select Menu -
Invite your friends
OT: How do you avoid getting depressed by all the bad news in the world (Terrorism)?
It seems the news is continually filled with bad tidings: terrorism, murders, child abuse, etc. How do you cope with all the negative information? Of course I could boycott all news, but that seems extreme and I DO want to know something about what goes on in the world. Hiding my head under a rock doesn't seem to be the solution. How do YOU cope?
Fri. Aug 11, 12:02pm
I can cope because I surrounded by the positive every day and I know that these are sensational stories and that the news doesn't report on the good stuff people are doing nearly as often as they report on the bad. The thousands of people leading quiet lives of goodness don't get nearly the attention of the few bad ones.
I am also rather discriminating about where I get my news, preferring venues that are a bit drier and more fact-driven than the over-the-top-OMG-dramaDramaDRAMA approach of say CNN or Fox news (although they can't come close to the breathless gravity of our local news). Listen to NPR and BBC and either listen to the radio or read your news - stay away from TV broadcasts (at least try this for a couple weeks and see if it helps you stay informed but not depressed).
Friday, August 11, 2006, 12:34 PM
Sure, bad stuff happens. You keep your eye on it, you make sure it's nothing you need to worry about, and then you move on.
Bad stuff happens, but good stuff happens too- Sometimes, you just need to remind yourself that.
Remember that your chances of being killed by a terrorist are dwarfed by your chances of being killed in your car, and you're willing to take that risk every day...
Sometimes, you've just got to say "who cares?"
Friday, August 11, 2006, 12:37 PM
I watch TV less and less. It also depends on what your reaction is to the news. Yesterday for example, we can be happy that the plot was uncovered. We can be happy that a concerned British Muslim helped to foil it. We can be happy that despite all the political carping, governments in many countries are doing a decent job of fighting terrorism. And remember that only bad news gets reported, which is the #1 reason to limit the intake of news. Especially local news.
BTW it is GORGEOUS on the east cost today. Has anyone gone for a walk yet?
Friday, August 11, 2006, 12:43 PM
Calling NPR and the BBC fact driven is like calling Bush a liberal. They have an agenda, just like Fox has an agenda- they are just different ones.
Friday, August 11, 2006, 12:46 PM
Well, NPR isn't comercially funded, so not ratings-driven and therefore not as sensationalistic as Fox and CNN. NPR can afford to report on a broader spectrum of news than just what will "draw viewers in."
Prayer is about the only way I can cope - saying "Who cares" is not an option for me, because I DO care.
Friday, August 11, 2006, 1:06 PM
well how did you cope every day before the "war on terror" began? you must have known about starving children, pedophiles, domestic violence, homelessness, etc.
what i do is find (a) cause(s) that i can do something about, and then volunteer to help. for example, i volunteered at a local nursing home as a "visitor" for those who had none. i also volunteer to give blood every 60 days (one single donation can save 3 lives!!!). i offer rides to my neighbors w/o a car, or offer to pick up their shopping list for them. i donate used or unwanted gifts of clothing to local shelters. by extending yourself to those immediately around you and seeing the difference(s) that you can make in someone's life, you might focus a little less on the topics that cause you stress.
Friday, August 11, 2006, 1:11 PM
OP here: Thanks for all the great suggestions! I intend to put some of those into effect. The local news programs are VERY negative so I think I will just stick with BBC or NPR.
Friday, August 11, 2006, 1:12 PM
This is going to sound crass, but why care? If "caring" only serves to make you feel just guilty enough to feel bad but not guilty enough to do anything to solve the problems, then it's a waste of time, and a hollow sham.
So, stop faking it and say "who cares,"
OR join the army, join the police force, join an aid organization, give your money to charity, make a difference.
Not watching the news is just a self deluding way of saying "who cares".
If you ACTUALLY care, ACTUALLY do something. If you don't care that much, then quit complaining.
sorry to be harsh.
Friday, August 11, 2006, 1:23 PM
How does it go.... accept the things I can not change and courage to change the things I can......
not to harsh previous poster, you spoke the truth....
Friday, August 11, 2006, 1:45 PM
grant me the strength to accept that which I cannot change
the courage to change that which I can
and the knowledge to know the difference
Friday, August 11, 2006, 2:01 PM
Stick with BBC and NPR and you will find yourself only getting one side of the story, and it will always be a negative one towards teh administration. Get your news from multiple sources and, with a more accurate picture, it will ease your mind somewhat.
Terrorism is something that the US has had the LUXURY of escaping somewhat for many many years. We are now like the countries all over the world, except luckily, we have the means, leadership and capital to lead an effort and fight on their land vs. ours.
Friday, August 11, 2006, 2:04 PM
I'm not so sure that we can be happy about yesterday. For one thing, draconian security measures on aircraft will make our lives miserable but they are not going to be what prevents terror attacks. The law functions on a basis of mutual trust within society and it is that mutual trust that needs to be rebuilt.
Secondly, I would await the evidence before assuming that any plot was foiled at all. The British authorities have already stated clearly that they did not know any particular details, In fact the indiscriminate banning of hand luggage suggests that they are reacting to Chinese Whispers picked up by "intelligence" (the same "intelligence" that plagiarized some guy's outdated thesis from the internet to present as their official report advocating invading Iraq).
Bear in mind that this time last year the police shot a completely innocent Brazilian young man dead at point blank range with 7 bullets on the London Underground. For a good week we heard all kinds of overblown bullshit about foiled plots, a middle eastern man carrying explosives, wearing a padded coat, with wires hanging from it, running from police. All the early reports were lies - he wasn't running, he wasn't middle eastern (lord help him if he was), he wore nothing padded and there were no wires. They executed an innocent man. And everyone applauded them for days!
And wasn't there a similar situation recently of a US Air Marshal shooting (to death, in the back?) some guy who was having a nervous breakdown on a grounded plane? Having armed Air Marshals on a plane makes me feel far more distressed - nothing to be happy about there either.
Similarly, over the past year, there have been several high profile invasions of people's homes in the UK, which led to a media frenzy, but ultimately we learnt that there had been a police mistake.
Just because our authorities have decided they can detain people at will without charges or evidence, does not make these people guilty. I will await the evidence and ignore the hype, which the American media in particular seems to thrive on.
Personally, I cannot say "who cares" to the conflicts or military/terrorist attacks or intensification of security or energy crises and environmental disasters that flood our news. But to keep myself sane I also:
- avoid all US TV news coverage (I care about the news, but I don't care for one-sided comment or misinformation)
- keep myself informed with newspapers, online sources, radio, updates from friends who are journalists...
- read up on recent history to see how previous depressing situations I remember from my own lifetime turned out (South Africa, Bosnia)
- remind myself that other people are as upset by what they see as i am
- tell myself that this too will pass
- look for and note any good things I see about people day to day, and remind myself of these every single time a government's actions or people's opinions break my heart (this is quite a struggle sometimes! how people think is quite a shock to my system)
- write to my local MP in England (either individually, or on a petition) voicing my opinion, if it is an issue that she will be voting on in parliament
PS To the person at 1:23pm and his/her 1:45pm backer:
Unless you are currently felons, you have the right to vote, no? Moreover, assuming you are lucky enough to be God-Bless-Americans, you have the right to vote in the most powerful and influential (not to mention most energy-consuming) country in the world. And because of the particular type of democracy you have, you get to elect all kinds of people, not just your local/national government. So by definition you can make a difference. I'm amused by the idea that only people with certain professions or only rich people can "make a difference".
I do think the God, Grant Me Serenity prayer is a good one to repeat when one gets upset by anything that it beyond one's control. Marcus Aurelius' meditations are also a good place to turn. But acceptance is not the equivalent of not-caring or not-trying.
Friday, August 11, 2006, 2:05 PM
Draconian security measures????
It is PROVEN that racial profiling acts as an effective method in preventing some terrorist attacks.
Friday, August 11, 2006, 2:08 PM
I think that if a Democrat was in the White House, the media would be a lot more open to supporting the war on terror. The truth is that the only war the media supports right now is a war on the Bush administration. I think the whole anti-war movement is simply a cynical effort on the part of the left to fight Bush because they have failed everywhere else to either stop him or get more Democrats elected.
Right now the Democrats think that terrorism is a) not that big of a problem and certainly not worse than Bush or b) that it is something that can be contained in little pockets around the world. The GOP might be wholly owned by corporate america and Big Church, but at least they have a more realisitc view of the threat.
Friday, August 11, 2006, 2:13 PM
powerfrau- I'm curious to know how we go about building "mutual trust" with people who are determined to kill us?
Friday, August 11, 2006, 2:21 PM
powerfrau- 1:23 poster here- I think you misunderstood me. Actually, I know you misunderstood me.
I'm not against caring- far from it- I'mm against pretending to care to make yourself feel better.
Care and do something, or don't care and do nothing. But don't pretend to care.
Friday, August 11, 2006, 2:48 PM
racial profiling would not have helped out with tim mcveigh, the unabomber, or other white terrorists. if we continue to profile based on race, don't you think the terror groups will just use white guys instead?
Friday, August 11, 2006, 2:50 PM
the first step in "doing" is "caring". why would you persuade someone not to care at all? if we stopped caring entirely-even if all we do is care-then the chances of us taking action go away completely.
Friday, August 11, 2006, 2:54 PM
how much success do you think they would have doing this?
Friday, August 11, 2006, 2:59 PM
I don't understand the poster who said that the media would support the war on terror more if a Democrat were in office. It seems to me like the media does support the war on terror.
The war in Iraq is not the war on terror. Those are two very separate wars. When we went int Afghanistan right after Sept. 11th, and helped oust the Taliban, that was part of the war on terror. Iraq and Saddam Hussein, well, go back to the early news on that war. Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden hated each other.
I'm trying hard not to give my opinion of the war in Iraq. But, that, to my knowledge, is the war that Democrats and the media oppose. I've never heard anyone being against the war on terror. If I'm wrong, please correct me!
Friday, August 11, 2006, 3:26 PM
Friday, August 11, 2006, 3:28 PM
"The war in Iraq is not the war on terror"- um, who have we been killing over there? Iraq is the war on terror buffet. It has given us a chance to kill local Sunni terrorists, a huge chunk of Al Qaeda (remember a guy named Zarqawi), and now a whole bunch of Iranian terrorists who are going nuts in the place.
Friday, August 11, 2006, 3:39 PM
Actually I am part of as you put it "God-Bless-Americans"
1) I do vote
2) I also currently serve my country in my employement
3) The elections that I am voting on do not affect my current administration and the choices they make
I don't know where you heard about a air marshall shooting on man on a grounded flight but hey you know I do miss an incident from time to time.
Friday, August 11, 2006, 3:47 PM
it was some guy who freaked out, apparently had some words w/ the flight attendant, then left the plane and ignored the orders to stop. his family claimed his episode was due to his bipolar disease.
Friday, August 11, 2006, 3:54 PM
That was in Miami, very sad.
Friday, August 11, 2006, 3:55 PM
to help me cope, i started a cooking club in the veteran's memorial home near my hometown. it feels right to give back to those who have served for the purpose of keeping me free.
"if you can read this, thank a teacher. if you can read this in english, thank a veteran."
Friday, August 11, 2006, 3:56 PM
How do I cope?
- Reminding myself that peace on earth starts with me. Have I encouraged someone today? Have I used gentle speech? Is the world a better place because I was here today?
Friday, August 11, 2006, 4:15 PM
Zarqawi was the head of the Iraqi branch of Al Qaida; he was not supported by the Iraqi gov't. The war on terror led to his arrest, not the war in Iraq. The war on terror has no country boundaries.
We are not capturing Iranians in Iraq. Iranians are in Iran. Very different country.
In Iraq, we ousted Saddam Hussein's regime, which was accused of treating citizens inhumanely, and are attempting to replace the government with a democratic gov't where the people elect the officials. That is the goal in Iraq. It is not to fight terrorism. It is to fight government's abuse of citizens.
The "Sunni militants" and other rebels in Iraq are loyal to the Iraqi regime, and want to keep them in power. That is why they are violent to our troops. They are not trying to explode airplanes in other countries.
Al Qaida is a terrorist network that has associates in many countries, including the United States. Just b/c we captured the head of Al Qaida in Iraq, well... We haven't captured the head of Al Quaida in America! That seems like a much bigger deal to me!
Friday, August 11, 2006, 4:29 PM
Iranians are all over Iraq, Syria, Lebanon btw. This is a complex situation that can't be reduced to some over simplified talking points. There are all sorts of different threats. The Iranian threat is a shiite one, the Iraqi threat was comprised of Sunni baathists (fascists essentially in the state sense), and Saddam was a huge supporter of terrorism. Sunni radicals were the ones behind 9/11. So three separate buckets so to speak- but we are fighting these simultaneously in Iraq. AQ had a small connection to Iraq prior to the war (and going back to the 90's), but developed a huge presence after the war because they were drawn in.
Friday, August 11, 2006, 4:41 PM
In that case, it's our fault (the US's) that AQ is such a big force in Iraq. That makes me feel even better........
So the war in Iraq started to help "free" the people in Iraq from the Sunni fascists, but now we also have to fight AQ there, b/c we essentially brought them in?
No wonder people are against this war!
Friday, August 11, 2006, 4:52 PM
Your right I remember that now abot the air marshal, I had forgotten because I believed the air marshall had done right.
Friday, August 11, 2006, 5:12 PM
I'm not sure if fault is the right word. Whether it was intention or unintentional, the US presence in Iraq caused AQ to flock there- where they were killed in large numbers. A "flypaper" effect so to speak. AQ stated repeatedly that democracy in Iraq was a huge threat to their objectives (establishing Islamic caliphate)
Strategically the Iraq invasion forced the issue in the region between the moderates and the radicals. Whether you are Bin Laden or Iran, democracy in Iraq is public enemy #1. As we see daily, folks in the region are not indifferent to the prospect of a democratic Iraq. Different factions are taking sides and killing each other over it.
Friday, August 11, 2006, 5:24 PM
to the 4:15PM poster, thanks for your gentle words and kind response. I would do well to abide by them. :-)
The question was not whether Bush is bad or the "War on Terror" is bad or whether you care enough or not: The question was how do YOU cope. Thanks again for answering the question.
Friday, August 11, 2006, 8:35 PM
It's all about power and money. I don't read the news cause there is nothing nice in it. Would be nice if everyday we could read something that is good going on in this world.
Just look at the kids nowadays. They kill each other for a pair of shoes and they are our future. They took away our rights of being parents not being able to control our children. Now if our kids kill someone it's our fault. Same thing go with our schools. Let us have the right to smack our kids if they deserve it no wonder there is so many killings or rapes in our country. Not a day goes by without some kid shooting one another.
Saturday, August 12, 2006, 10:45 AM
to the 10:45 am poster: I know this is completely off topic but I felt I needed to add my two cents to your post. Yes I agree that many of our children need more discipline. I don't agree however that it is because the government and schools no longer allow us to smack our kids. I believe it is because many of us as parents are too busy working and living to be bothered with loving our children enough to give them firm boundaries. Whether you "smack" your kid with your hand (which I don't do myself) or with your words, they need firm guidance to know that we care enough to make sure they make the right choices. Watching some of the shows on Nanny 911 or those like them, shows me how lax parents have become with guiding their children to the right choices. Even IF the government banned all corporal punishment, children can still be disciplined properly, although it takes more of an effort than spanking, the results are far more positive.
Kids going out and shooting others or doing drugs or whatever poor behavior they are choosing is because their parents don't care enough to monitor what they are doing, not because we can't "smack" them anymore. Get the parents off their duffs, off drugs or alcohol, or whatever else is preventing them being there for their kids, and we will have a safer society.
Saturday, August 12, 2006, 2:28 PM
How do I cope? I laugh...
"Q. Why are we in Iraq?
A. Terror! By occupying Iraq we get Iraqis to fight us there so they won’t fight us at home.
Q. We’ve cleverly lured them to where they already were, only in terrorist form!
A. Now you’re catching on!
Q. What if we can’t kill all the terrorists in Iraq?
A. Then we’ll invade somewhere else and trick ‘em into attacking us there – only this time it’ll be someplace really far away where they’ll get stuck, like the ocean or the moon!
Q. I would totally watch Operation: Lunar Justice live on CNN!
A. Wolf Blitzer in a space helmet… it writes itself!
Q. There are more terrorists now than before the war. Is the occupation causing more terror?
A. Well, nobody can say for sure if that’s a man-made terror increase. It may just be a periodic shift in the natural terror cycle.
Q. Tell me more about this “not our fault” theory – I find it oddly compelling.
A. Like weather, terror is affected by seasonal fluctuations. The jet stream carries hijackers from continent to continent; El Niño causes suicide bombers to condense in the upper atmosphere. Is this affected by human activity or just part of a natural warming trend for terror? We just don’t know!
Q. Your ideas are boldly nonconformist, yet conveniently reaffirm my desire to do nothing. I like it!"
There's more here:
Wednesday, August 23, 2006, 3:39 PM
News fast. I don't read or watch the news. If there is something sufficiently important, someone else will tell you about it. Most news is regarding things that you have very little/no power to change or control. Why stress yourself out about it? If there is something you want to know, research it yourself with sources that you trust.
Wednesday, August 23, 2006, 4:49 PM
Pray. Devotionals. Bible study. Coffee with good friends. Do something for someone else, volunteering can make you feel like you're making a difference in the world.
Wednesday, August 30, 2006, 12:03 PM
Think Global, Act local
I work 12 hour shifts as a nurse. When I am on 2-3 days at a time, I feel as if I am in a sort of bubble. No news, just drive, work, drive and sleep. What I've noticed is that when I get a few days off and tune into the news, not much in the big picture has changed. It's like a chess game, pieces are moved around on the board but bascially nothing is new. Stories come and go. I keep abreast of the events of the day as much as I can and confess to being a recovering news junkie. But just like otthers have suggested, the thing that works for me is to be informed and work to make MY world better; volunteering at school, working for a local candidate, helping people in need. I recently started knitting for an organization called Afgans for Afgans which collects knitted hats, scarves and gloves for the people of Afganistan. Whatever your view of the wars, citizens, real people are hurting. There is enough out there to do.
Wednesday, August 30, 2006, 12:44 PM
i agree with the above poster and general theme of this thread. being "aware" of something is not the same as doing something. it doesn't matter how much you keep up with current events and let them bother you if you don't give back on a local level. if current events leave you emotional and depressed, then get involved on the local scale. for example, if the war on terror bothers you, then work with a refugee here in the U.S. my perspective changed after i met a bright young girl from afghanistan who wants to be a doctor, but was beaten almost daily in afghanistan when the taliban caught her carrying books.
but what annoys me more than anything? people who fly across the country in private jets to give speeches and raise awareness of global warming. people who throw $1000 / plate dinners to raise awareness on hunger, rather than just buying food for the homeless or volunteering at a food kitchen. celebrities who host telethons and ask the working-class to give money for whatever cause, while they hold onto their millions.
please, only make me aware of something by setting an example, not telling me what i should do.
Wednesday, August 30, 2006, 1:00 PM
charity by itself is NOT the best solution to social problems
I disagree. Firstly, I think being aware of something is actually *extremely* important of itself and has an impact in itself (for example you communicate your awareness, you lend your empathy to a victim/cause, and you vote). Moreover, I think charity can unintentionally do more harm than good when it comes to social/environmental/global problems. These are of a scale where changes are required in legislation and in policy. Charity often gives governments an excuse to shirk their responsibilities and do nothing. These acts offer a band-aid solution to haemorraging problems, and ones that could have been prevented at the outset.
Boycotting all charity is futile, because it is doubtful such a strategy would by itself force a government's hand (for that we'd have to organize everyone who contributes charitably, no matter how minor the scale, to march on their govt HQs or undertake civil disobedience, and even then I think we would fail). But it is a fact that expansion of the voluntary sector has made destruction in the public sector easier to accomplish, to the extent that these days many people have no choice but to do things that should be a government's responsibility.
Thankfully, there remains *some* political pressure on governments to address hardship, and increasing this is the key. To shun political activism and awareness campaigns in favour of rattling a tin is to miss an opportunity.
For example, it's all very well to help an Afghan refugee, and it is definitely a great thing to do. But a refugee is a refugee is a refugee. Wouldn't it have been a million times better for taxpayers/voters en masse to say something when America was busy training and funding the militias that became the Taliban, as a PROVOCATIVE measure against the USSR into war in Afghanistan? In order for a country to adopt an ethical foreign policy, its people need to voice their desire for it, and in order for that to happen, awareness of what is happening and consideration of the consequences is the absolute key.
Interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski from Le Nouvel Observateur
January 15-21, 1998, p. 76
Q: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs ["From the Shadows"], that American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct?
Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise: Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.
Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?
B: It isn't quite that. We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.
Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn't believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don't regret anything today?
B: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter: We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.
Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundementalists, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?
B: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?
Wednesday, August 30, 2006, 2:19 PM
ooops! i meant i mainly agree..
actually, i mainly agree with you, 1pm poster. the celebrities and telethons example you mention is exactly what i'm criticizing. i think i really do agree with most of your points, but i just feel that acting locally on a small scale via charity is not enough to make the necessary changes, and without any political campaigning alongside, that kind of charity can in fact be self-defeating...
thank you for making me think with your post!
Wednesday, August 30, 2006, 2:26 PM
powerfrau - we may have to agree to disagree on some issues. i think the government has too many resonsibilities and is spread too thin, which is why a large amount of tax-payer money goes to paper-shuffling instead of actually getting to the people who need it (just look at hurricane katrina). if private charities picked up the slack on whatever level they're equipped to handle, then it would give the government more time to mess with the big issues. and there are also plenty of studies out there which show that private groups with less paper-shuffling tend to be more effective for problems such as helping drug-addicts. just look at AA for an example.
i also have a fundamental belief difference than you do - i don't think it's the government's responsibility to babysit people from birth to death who can't ever get their act together short term help? i'm all for that. but not the continual hand-holding. through my job, i've seen too many people put more effort into getting money out of the government than they put into improving their own lives. they use their disadvantage - whether physical, economic, social, etc - as their greatest asset and talent. i think if the local community took care of their needs instead of simply getting a check in the mail every month that they would feel a little more motivated to get back on their feet, and thank the friend or neighbor who helped them do it.
please understand that i'm not criticizing your own argument. we're just starting on completely different bases and drawing equally valid, although completely different, conclusions based on those different starting points. you come from the background that it's the government's job to provide charity and small groups get in the way, while i believe that responsibility belongs to local non-profit groups, churches, and community organizations and that government bureaucracy gets in the way. i stay informed and get involved with what interests me. i ask that others who get involved also stay informed. i ask that they choose their volunteer groups appropriately based on reputation and effectiveness. but i also ask that the government quits telling me and everyone else how to live our lives and where to send our money.
powerfrau - thanks for hearing me out! i like learning how others approach problems in completely different ways than me - at least when the argument makes sense and they are well-informed. you helped me understand, and i hope i can do the same for you. i'm not trying to convince you, just help you see things differently.
Wednesday, August 30, 2006, 3:36 PM
powerfrau, your posting about the Soviet-Afgan war made me think of something that had been in the back of my mind for almost 30 years. When the Soviets went into Afganistan, a friend of mine, a registered Communist, told me they were there to remove the Americans. He said the US govt had set up shop on their boarder and they had an absolute right to be there. I dismissed that as just one of his many tirades towards the US. Fast forward 26 years and I'm far less likely to dismiss the story now. Thanks. GatorGirl
Wednesday, August 30, 2006, 4:06 PM
How To Lose Weight- The Basics
Weight Watchers Points System
The Fat Smash Diet
The Eat To Live Diet
The Beck Diet Solution
How To Get The Motivation To Lose Weight
How To Be Successful Using PEERtrainer
How To Burn Fat
Online Weight Loss Support- How It Works
Does Green Tea Help You Lose Weight?
Tips On Using PEERtrainer
Visit The PEERtrainer Community
Diet and Fitness Resources
Weight Watchers Meetings
Learning To Inspire Others: You Already Are
Writing Down Your Daily Workouts
Spending Money On A Personal Trainer?
How I Became A Marathon Runner
How To Prevent Injuries During Your Workout
Flu Season: Should You Take The Flu Shot?
Are You Really Ready To Start PEERtrainer?
Super Foods That Can Boost Your Energy
Reversing Disease Through Nutrition
New Diet and Fitness Articles:
Weight Watchers Points Plus
How To Adjust Your Body To Exercise
New: Weight Watchers Momentum Program
New: PEERtrainer Blog Archive
Review Of The New Weight Watchers Momentum Program
Weight Loss Motivation by Joshua Wayne:
Why Simple Goal Setting Is Not Enough
How To Delay Short Term Gratification
How To Stay Motivated
How To Exercise With A Busy Schedule
Real World Nutrition and Fitness Questions
Can Weight Lifting Help You Lose Weight?
Are Protein Drinks Safe?
Nutrition As Medicine?
Everyday Weight Loss Tips
How To Eat Healthy At A Party
How To Eat Out And Still Lose Weight
The Three Bite Rule
Tips On How To Stop A Binge
Introducing The PEERtrainer Cheat System
How To Speed Up Weight Loss
How To Get Motivation To Lose Weight
Weight Watchers: The New Science!
3 Myths About Weight Loss With JJ Virgin
Related Article :
New PEERtrainer Articles :
Why Green Tea Helps You Lose Weight
How To Lose A Lot Of Weight, Fast
5 Things You Must Know Before Doing A Cleanse
New: How To Build Muscle
What Is The Best Kind Of Protein Powder?
The Master Cleanse
Will Removing Gluten From Your Diet Help You Lose Weight?
How To Obliterate Your Limitations
How To Get The Motivation To Exercise
How To Stop Feeling Tired
Dr. Joel Fuhrman's Super Immunity Diet
The PEERtrainer Diet
Is Portion Control Keeping You Fat?
The Ultimate Guide To Dietary Fiber
P90X? Do Burst Training Instead
Weight Watchers Points Changes For 2012
Can Diet Soda Cause You To GAIN Weight?